California courts can exclude an AI deepfake video unless the proponent authenticates it under Evidence Code § 1401, and the judge finds it is what they claim it is. In criminal cases, deepfakes raise acute risks of misidentification, fabrication, and unfair prejudice, especially when presented as “caught on video” proof. This article explains how California […]
Yes—an AI-generated witness statement can be admitted in court, as a judge has now allowed such evidence in at least one case. The ruling signals that AI outputs may be treated like other digital records, but only if parties can meet authentication, reliability, and hearsay requirements. This article explains what the decision means, the legal
Can AI Testify in Court? A Judge Just Said Yes. Read More »
AI-generated evidence is admissible only if it meets 4 core requirements: relevance, authentication, reliability, and surviving Rule 403 prejudice concerns. Courts typically require metadata, chain of custody, and sometimes expert testimony to show how the AI content was created and whether it was altered. This article explains when AI outputs can be used at trial
When AI-Generated Evidence Is Admissible in Court — and When It Isn’t Read More »
